KJs in the monkey house

[Joe Tall]

[ QUOTE ]
...KJs in that type of game is well above their average hand that they're going to the flop with?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well above is an extremely exaggerated, b. KJs teeters on the neut-EV range in this situation. Bad players still get good cards my friend and we have to remember the 3-better knows that he'll likely pay 3+ bets to see ths flop.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
...KJs in that type of game is well above their average hand that they're going to the flop with?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well above is an extremely exaggerated, b. KJs teeters on the neut-EV range in this situation. Bad players still get good cards my friend and we have to remember the 3-better knows that he'll likely pay 3+ bets to see ths flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

It might not be that exaggerated if the guy is that loose preflop with his raises. If he has a history of jamming preflop anyways, his range isn't going to change much regardless of what he thinks may happen after his raise. Especially if he'd likely have 3 bet here if there wasn't a straddle but an actual wild raise in front of him. You may be giving him too much credit for thinking about that.

Bad players that jam alot preflop get bad cards much more than good cards when they're doing this. Much worse cards than KJs. Sure, sometimes they do actually have something. Them's the breaks when it does.

b

[Joe Tall]

I know Pstove is showdown numbers and poker does really work like that but here a run at it:

Hand 1: 28.7484 % [ 00.27 00.01 ] { AA-22, AKs-A2s, KQs-K8s, QJs-QTs, JTs, AKo-A2o, KQo-K9o, QJo-QTo, JTo }
Hand 2: 19.6655 % [ 00.19 00.01 ] { random }
Hand 3: 19.6635 % [ 00.19 00.01 ] { random }
Hand 4: 31.9227 % [ 00.31 00.01 ] { KJs }


For what it's worth I call w/KQs here:

Hand 1: 27.9476 % [ 00.27 00.01 ] { AA-22, AKs-A2s, KQs-K8s, QJs-QTs, JTs, AKo-A2o, KQo-K9o, QJo-QTo, JTo }
Hand 2: 19.3093 % [ 00.18 00.01 ] { random }
Hand 3: 19.2785 % [ 00.18 00.01 ] { random }
Hand 4: 33.4646 % [ 00.32 00.01 ] { KQs }

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
I know Pstove is showdown numbers and poker does really work like that but here a run at it:

Hand 1: 28.7484 % [ 00.27 00.01 ] { AA-22, AKs-A2s, KQs-K8s, QJs-QTs, JTs, AKo-A2o, KQo-K9o, QJo-QTo, JTo }
Hand 2: 19.6655 % [ 00.19 00.01 ] { random }
Hand 3: 19.6635 % [ 00.19 00.01 ] { random }
Hand 4: 31.9227 % [ 00.31 00.01 ] { KJs }


For what it's worth I call w/KQs here:

Hand 1: 27.9476 % [ 00.27 00.01 ] { AA-22, AKs-A2s, KQs-K8s, QJs-QTs, JTs, AKo-A2o, KQo-K9o, QJo-QTo, JTo }
Hand 2: 19.3093 % [ 00.18 00.01 ] { random }
Hand 3: 19.2785 % [ 00.18 00.01 ] { random }
Hand 4: 33.4646 % [ 00.32 00.01 ] { KQs }

[/ QUOTE ]

2% difference between KJs and KQs? I'm coming in with both.

Where's the mid suited connectors that he could be 3 betting with also? [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

b

[Noo Yawk]

I agree with Bernie. In games like this where guys are giving away their money by trying to build pots and jam everyone else off the hand, you need to be getting in there when you have position and show them your one of the guys. Get in there and take your share. If your going to fold KJ suited here to some random straddle and pot building raise, you should find a more comftorable game.

[DeezNutz3]

I like a reraise here. I know people are saying you can be dominated but with typical Cant. 8/16 games they will be raising 79o, 25s etc...you are truly against a random range of hands. I think the key thing is position here. I love my position with this above average hand against bad postflop players. I think I'll be up in the beginning of January to play some 30.

[Joe Tall]

[ QUOTE ]
2% difference between KJs and KQs? I'm coming in with both.


[/ QUOTE ]

We aren't playing KJs vs KQs, the difference is higher, look again.

[ QUOTE ]
Where's the mid suited connectors that he could be 3 betting with also?

[/ QUOTE ]

I ran those in the airport last night too, still got the data but I just got home from the Red-eye so, I'm out of it. It's all still close to the same result as you can expect; post it later.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
We aren't playing KJs vs KQs, the difference is higher, look again

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't say you were playing them vs one another. I see KJs having 31.9% and KQs having 33.46%. Unless I'm reading something wrong.

[ QUOTE ]
Hand 1: 28.7484 % [ 00.27 00.01 ] { AA-22, AKs-A2s, KQs-K8s, QJs-QTs, JTs, AKo-A2o, KQo-K9o, QJo-QTo, JTo }
Hand 2: 19.6655 % [ 00.19 00.01 ] { random }
Hand 3: 19.6635 % [ 00.19 00.01 ] { random }
Hand 4: 31.9227 % [ 00.31 00.01 ] { KJs }


For what it's worth I call w/KQs here:

Hand 1: 27.9476 % [ 00.27 00.01 ] { AA-22, AKs-A2s, KQs-K8s, QJs-QTs, JTs, AKo-A2o, KQo-K9o, QJo-QTo, JTo }
Hand 2: 19.3093 % [ 00.18 00.01 ] { random }
Hand 3: 19.2785 % [ 00.18 00.01 ] { random }
Hand 4: 33.4646 % [ 00.32 00.01 ] { KQs }


[/ QUOTE ]

[Joe Tall]

[ QUOTE ]
I didn't say you were playing them vs one another

[/ QUOTE ]

You are effectively saying it when you say this...

[ QUOTE ]
I see KJs having 31.9% and KQs having 33.46%

[/ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]
Unless I'm reading something wrong

[/ QUOTE ]

You are reading fine, you just fail to see out of KJ vs KQ. When it is really

KJ vs their range

versus

KQ vs their range

Get it?

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
You are reading fine, you just fail to see out of KJ vs KQ. When it is really

KJ vs their range

versus

KQ vs their range

Get it?


[/ QUOTE ]

How I'm seeing it is:

KJ v their range is 31.9%

KQ v their range is 33.46%

I'm not saying your playing against one another, you are comparing. How else can you compare them? Which is why I asked if I was missing something. Versus their range of hands, I see the difference as about 1.5% in having either hand against their range. How else am I supposed to interpret it? Easier: I'll just say both are at least 31.9% against the hand ranges. To me, that's enough to come in against 3 opponents with either hand.

b